rpavich Loc: West Virginia

Bingo.

it's a question of authority; who's the ultimate authority for a person's thinking?

God (who cannot lie and was there) or fallible men making wild-guesses about things they can't possibly know and change their story every few years?

I know who I believe.

Now get ready for the name calling...that's next.

Harry0 Loc: Gardena, Cal

Well, if you have a senior señor, that may have been an appropriate message.
Yeah, I don't think we'd have a dinosaur equivalent of our society. They were getting smaller, smarter, and becoming more like pack and/or herd animals. Bigger prey = bigger predators; you don't need to be a lion to hunt rabbits.
IMNSHO, depending on conditions, we'd either have the dinosaurian analogue of the African plains or the South American jungles from 500 years ago..
BTW, birds are dinosaurs.
BTW, dinosaurs aren't reptiles.
What if it was a different asteroid, and insects ruled? It's been said that if spiders were the size of house cats, there wouldn't be people. We'd go from solo animals, to herds and packs, to hive societies. Like the "bugs" on Starship Troopers.

rpavich Loc: West Virginia

Except for one thing...He didn’t do anything like what Jerry described.

God is clear on what a dino is, when the dinos came to be, and when the dinos lived.

Evolution is inconsistent with Gods account of creation. Men have been trying to mix the two for a long time, but it doesn’t work.

We all have the same evidence, but we come to wildly differing conclusions based on our starting assumptions...who we have as our ultimate authority.

For Christians it’s supposed to be God’s word. For non-Christians it’s mans fallible ever changing ideas.

tomcat

The problem is that most of man-kind, and not necessarily non-Christians because there are believers that are not Christians, is searching for a scientific and tangible proof of the origins of life and our earth. They cannot accept the most obvious solution that we had a divine creator because it requires faith in a concept that they cannot measure. Think of the number of people that would be out of jobs and have nothing to do if they didn't cling to their wild theories. These relentless "treasure hunters" will never be able to explain the origin of the universe and life on earth with science. And that's the key---it was not a measurable event that can be replicated. When I was a kid and played with firecrackers, I set off several big bangs and the things that I blew up never formed a definable shape even remotely like the earth. I am a retired biochemist that spent a life-time doing research in the blood and plasma field and the things that I have seen under the microscope convinced me that we are indeed divinely created. The strange things that our bodies do and the complicated processes that we have are not things that could have evolved with time. Most of these nut-case geologists are not even aware of the complexity of life forms and what it takes to sustain it. What they should be doing is to find out where the flood waters went and how that impacted the depths of the oceans. Only problem is that requires a submarine.....

rpavich Loc: West Virginia

My only objection to all you said.

By definition; anyone who's not a Christian isn't a believer, they are an idolator. There are not other God's but the Christian God carefully defined by His word. Any other is made up.

pendennis

You're conflating non-believers (i.e. atheists) with those who worship something, or someone who's not "God".

I do not believe in God, or a god of any kind; I do not worship anything.

Evolution is the belief that everything arose from the "ground" (sea, swamp, water, etc.) up. Think in terms of cranes, not sky hooks. Buildings, bridges, etc., all start from the bottom, as did life on earth.

tomcat

Whether or not you believe in God is up to you, but there is no statistical way that evolution can lead to a higher life form beyond the swimmers in a scum pond. There is too much complication that would have to be placed on hold, awaiting a new mutation before it could move forward to the next stage of complexity. To whit, the immune system and how red blood cells move through the capillaries. The sodium-potassium pump across cell membranes could not have evolved on its own--it's just not thermodynamically possible. The generation of spinal fluid at 0200 each morning interacting with the blood-brain barrier is not something that could have evolved on its own, awaiting a host to accept it and then move on to the next level of complexity. There are more biochemical scientists that believe in divine creation than any other scientific field and that's because we see and know things about life that no one else has a clue about; excepting some physicians (and most of them only had a semester course)....

pendennis

Evolution on earth has been going on for billions of years. Life started and stopped, and restarted any number of times under a number of conditions. One-, then multi-cell creatures lived, died, and the changes started at the DNA level. It took any number of protein, amino acid, and enzyme combinations to yield what eventually became life.

And nothing likely "stood by" waiting to happen. It happened simultaneously, along billions of combinations, some working some not. The surviving combinations resulted in advancement of life. The survival of creatures depended on their adaptability to the environment.

A planet some 8K miles in diameter has surface area so large, and considering most of it was covered with water, it should come as no surprise that life evolved both in oceans, swamps, probably even the relatively minuscule amount of dry land 3.5 billion years ago. Even eyesight developed and died a number of times before eyes finally came about and stayed. Some creature(s) had a genetic mutation which allowed light sensitivity, allowing it to survive.

No human can possibly understand just how evolution worked. And it's still happening today.



And this proves divine intervention? We're only 400 years into the study of thermodynamic science, which didn't develop until James Watt invented the steam engine. And it's been technology advances which allow the sciences to develop. We're only around 100 years into the study of DNA, made possible by the invention of the X-ray. That's the blink of an eye in the 3.5 billion year evolution. The human genome wasn't decoded and mapped until 2003. That's today in evolutionary terms.

For instance, when people develop cancer, they're most often given chemical and/or radio therapy to fight the cancer. However, neither treatment is 100% effective because the DNA of the cancer cells mutates immediately, before it can be killed, not waiting to see if it can survive. It's one reason why cancer has a recurrence rate.

Then a cure for cancer, heart, Parkinson's, dementia/Alzheimer's diseases should just wait until there's a divine intervention? Scientists are actively looking at DNA alteration for cures, not waiting for some top down miracle from above. There is absolutely no scientific evidence for any type of "intelligent design".

Prayer and hope never have been, are not, and never will be operating plans. And just because some biochemical scientists believe in "God" doesn't make biochemistry a divine study.

tomcat

I can see that you've been doing too much reading and not enough thinking. I'm clearly not discussing this point with someone of intelligence or common sense, so I'm leaving this thread because you're not capable of discussing this point from a science based argument.

pendennis

By the same token, you've obviously spent too little time in reading.

Yes, I'm a voracious reader, and I've studied science, theology, social sciences, and philosophy, for over fifty years. Studying requires not only input, but process (thinking) of the subject matter, and output of that process.

You've spent too little time reading, not ingesting, and too much time listening to those who sell redemption. Come back when you can logically discuss these things.

KTJohnson Loc: Northern Michigan

pendennis and many others like to believe in evolution and that is their prerogative.

Considering this improbability/foolishness, G.K. Chesterton said it well, "It is absurd for the Evolutionist to complain that it is unthinkable for an admittedly unthinkable God to make everything out of nothing, and then pretend that it is more thinkable that nothing should turn into everything."

The Bible explains this very well, in Romans 1:20-22 (KJV)
"20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,"

IDguy Loc: Idaho

Modern research suggests feather jackets...

pendennis

As with other religionists, you're using the Bible and an author (among other titles) to support your thesis; neither of which are scientific in origin. The Christian religion was nothing unique. A number of monotheistic religions of similar tenets existed around the same time in the Middle East.

As I mentioned, there is no scientific support for any kind of "intelligent design", and religionists just can't let go of the thought that everything arises from the ground, up.

God and gods were created by people who did/do not have scientific explanations for natural phenomena. Science has proven that the earth is nearly 5 billion years old, and that the known universe is over 13.7 billion years old.

The same people who believed that the solar system was terran-centric, denied a solar-centric system, even after it was mathematically proven. Scientists were pariahs and even condemned as heretics by religionists who could/would not accept the truth of science. Technologist were treated the same way. Many were considered charlatans and fakes, even after their ideas were proven in actual use.

People brainwashed by Roman Catholic and Church of England doctrine, even in the 19th century, denied the existence of bacteria and its effects.

As to being an Evolutionist, I plead yes, and heartily so.

For those believing in an intelligent design by some omnipotent being, prove it scientifically. I take nothing on faith.

Harry0 Loc: Gardena, Cal

I have always been disappointed and disillusioned by people purportedly knowing God's plan. If you're a Creationist, why are you insisting that God couldn't build in a hard wired evolutionary mechanism to to protect His creations? Did the Voices tell you all this?
Evolution = breeding. Better adaptations/mutations = more better progeny.
BTW, the Great Spaghetti Monster said y'all are whiny pagan whores, meant to be digested.

rpavich Loc: West Virginia

Yes, I am.

By definition anyone who's not a Christian is a non-Christian...no matter what form it takes...idolator, etc...



That's fine...



Well...once again...that's the "myth" for sure...lots of made up stories to try and explain the existence of everything without God.